Affirmative Action Policies - Essay Example

Affirmative action policies This paper intends to research the history of affirmative action policies for both graduate and undergraduate programs in the United States, as well as develop an argumentative paper drawing a conclusion about the constitutionality of these policies. Factiously, America is a country with many people of different ethnic, racial, and other diverse backgrounds1. As such, matters related to sharing, equality, and fairness are of paramount importance and frequently give rise to need for mechanisms for addressing implications that come along with these mechanisms. Affirmative action traces its roots back in the Reconstruction Era whereby after slaves attained freedom, they had nothing else apart from small skills that could use to earn a living2. As a result, the victorious General T. Sherman set forth a proposal that was to divide the land and goods of the Southeastern Georgia into sizeable proportions and give the freed family 40 acres of land and a mule in order to begin their lives3. This move attracted a huge level of opposition from the sitting clergy. However, almost a century later, this issue of affirmative action has come back to haunt opponents of this policy. Today, the lawful society of the United States recognizes the idea of assisting individuals of minority decency to gain access to American goods. This came via a series of political initiatives and court proceedings that interpreted all the requirements of the civil rights just as provided in the Fourteenth Amendment 4. These initiatives, as well as court decisions, came into books as affirmative action. As the term itself suggests, it is both voluntary and mandatory in that it intends to affirm civically recognized rights of the designated classes of people by employing a positive action in order to protect these individuals from the rampant, all round, and pervasive incidents of discrimination in America. Sources indicate that affirmative action developed about four decades ago following the debate between the Board of Education and Brown5. In terms of Brown, the Supreme Court opined that children of minority races faced segregation and discrimination in areas of education. This fact denied these children equal education opportunities and rejected the doctrine that asserted “separate but equal” within the public schools6. Following increased cases of discrimination and victorious wins in wars like the Vietnam War, men and women of minority groups intensified their fight for equal rights. These members were able to integrate change in the nation’s existing laws and attained collective address in the Fourteenth Amendment. Following the success of affirmative action, members of the minority groups attained places in the employment and education sector. As the focus of this paper ascertains, changes in both the graduate and undergraduate programs in the US grew due to increased criticism from whites and men who claimed that the policies of affirmative action brought about something they termed as the “reverse discrimination”. To ensure, successful integration of affirmative action policies in undergraduate and graduate programs, the Court acted before business legislatures and executives and mandated coalition of positive actions in these programs7. As a matter of course, the Court set in place a number of devices that integrated and fostered indiscriminative measures towards students from minority backgrounds. These devices included majority to minority transfers, redistricting, new construction, magnet schools, school pairings, abandonment of all blacks’ schools, and busing. Investigations highlight that implications related to affirmative action particularly when compared to race consciousness and race blind admissions give explanations as to how alternative programs are impractical in general. With reference to a number of discussions, selections that base solely on academia qualifications such as the Medical College Admissions Test and Grade Point Averages scores do not achieve ethnic and racial diversity in different schools particularly the medical. Furthermore, these programs of selection based on academic prowess do not yield adequate prediction of success with regard to practicing physicians. Research findings reveal that race conscious programs in both undergraduate and graduate schools of medicine, preferences provide better yields when practices serve minority populations fosters biomedical research, progression, fosters a learning environment, which is exceptional and augments health care for patients from minority populations8. Presence of diversification in both graduate and undergraduate programs is fundamental to the well being of students and people of the United States. In the medicine faculty, diversity is significant given the fact that every single American needs medical attention. With this vein, affirmative action policies in medical schools of America need to take responsibility of selecting and instructing potential physician labor force for the future following the idea that medicine is one of the largest and greatest resources for this country 9. Cognitively, this is an arduous task that incorporates relevant screening for potential candidates of this subject who has what it takes to serve the citizens of this country at best. This means that both undergraduate and graduate programs affirmative action requires selection of candidates in terms of the academic ability, personality, skills, experience, and extra curriculum activities as opposed to race, ethnicity, and financial backgrounds10. Arguably, scores of education in both graduate and undergraduate programs depict minimal case of discrimination in matters of selection and admission. Despite that fact that medical schools in America have a duty to train medical students in various medical areas that consist of oncology, neurosurgery, pediatrics, internal medicine and emergency medicine, cases of segregation show neglected need for competency in medical training11. According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, medical schools are failing to produce competent medical workforce mainly because selection and admission of students is bias. Qualified students from minority populations fail to secure educational opportunities in different colleges since their backgrounds happen to have factors that do not accord them a direct admission into the school12. As a result, it is arguable that affirmative action policies are not yet in full force, thus, they are partially subjecting most students of minority backgrounds to educational inequality. Affirmative action policies ascertain that in order to achieve a diversified and race conscious educational opportunities, accredited colleges and universities of the US must depend on the caliber of students seeking admission in these institutions13. The selection in force for admitting students must add on to the traditional factors of standards selection, which seeks to attain a sustainable diverse student panel. Coherent adherence to these affirmative action policies can help minority populations generally classified by the AAMC as Native Americans, Hispanics, African Americans, and mainland Puerto Ricans attain preference in the process of admission in order to create a balanced student body with the ability to shape future of health care and other professions in America14. Note that the issue of affirmative action always sparks a series of turmoil among many including the populous press. Often, people cite affirmative action as a means of combating or rather curtailing the ever evolving, historical, and ongoing presence of discrimination in the US society. In order to ensure pragmatic means of school enrollment, the University Of Texas School Of Law set forth an implementation policy that lowered the standards of admission to all students from minority students. In this spectrum, the school put in place an index called the Texas Index that joined or rather combined grade point averages with the standardized scores of tests. Practically, the school set out that, the average acceptance marks for whites should be higher with ten points compared to those of non-whites15. With this policy, it came out that the students especially those from African American and Mexican American decency earned sufficient scores responsible for category of presumptive admits while whites who earned similar scores acquired the category of presumptive denials. Consequently, the court appeals invalidated the Texas Index policy by concluding that using the mechanism of race as the criteria for admission in schools is as arbitrary as use of blood type16. In the case of Grutter v. Bollinger, the top universities in America started using the factor of race in selecting students for admission when the US Supreme Court endorsed the concept of racial diversity in choosing students for admission. In June 2003, the Supreme Course endorsed a narrow decisional landmark consisting of a wide range of implications that affirmative action could bring across America17. The Court ruled that based on the interest of compelling the government on issues of racial diversity, the implications of affirmative action do not exert any violation of Equal Protection Clause upon giving the disadvantaged minorities in America some level of preferential treatment18. This ruling sourced its evidence from the facts that call for diversity can increase the benefits that minority populations bring to education, military, and business which are essential for cultivating “a clergy of leaders encompassed with legitimacy within the approach of citizenry”. Nevertheless, this case concluded that preferential treatment towards minorities should be temporary, not permanent and because of that, the court set out platforms commonly referred to as “sunset provisions” and “periodical reviews”19. In the case of Gratz v. Bollinger, it came out that companies could need to revise their modes of selecting employees since the Court resolved to strike down the process of admission that based on point system since they focused on race as a “decisive” mechanism as opposed to part of many determinants systems of admission20. Following this case, which affected the University of Michigan intensively, the Court considered to apply the decision on a number of selective private universities especially that received government funding21. Scores of this decision enlisted that affirmative action faced elimination in most undergraduate and graduate schools hence the proponents of this policy sought to push for its implementation through referendums and ballot initiatives. Therefore, year 2000 witnessed the state of Florida become the first state to do away with voluntary affirmative action and simultaneously set in place policies of admission into public universities22. These policies such as the Talented 20 Plan mandated top ten students who graduate from colleges in the top 20 must attain admission to one of the ten state universities. In conclusion, the policies of affirmative action remain indecisive and the fate of its programs is unclear due to the increased and continuous challenges that these policies face23. Even affirmative action is a constitutionally recognized right, the recent state government actions and federal court decisions suggest an impeding need for change of affirmative action policies in order to allow for constitutional muster in the near future. All arguments presented in this paper contain some fruit24. Thus, I argue that the US Supreme Court should validate or rather affirm affirmative action policies in both graduate and undergraduate programs to assist in diversifying higher education. Works Cited Cahn, Theodoulou. Public Policy: The Essential Readings. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2003. Print. Cassidy, Dale. RS Report for Congress. 18 Jun. 2012, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress website: http://www.sen.ca.gov/sor/reports/REPORTS_BY_SUBJ/ECONOMY_EMPLOYMENT/AFFIR MATIVE_ACTION.HTM Donaldson, Gary. Modern America: A Documentary History of the Nation Since 1945. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 2007. Print. Gardner, David. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan: People, Law, and Politics. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2012. Print. Landsberg, Brian. "Affirmative-Action Decision Indicated Shifts in Position." The Los Angeles Daily Journal, Vol. 116 (30). 54-66. Print. Lee, Adam. “The evolution of affirmative action”. Journal of Public Personnel Management, Vol. 28(3), 2004, pg. 393-408. Print. Long, Mark. “Race and College Admissions: An Alternative to Affirmative Action?” The Review of Economics and Statistics. Vol. 86, (4), 2004. p 1020-33. Print. Miller, Reyes. “The contextualization of affirmative action: A historical and political analysis”. Journal of The American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 41(2), 2002, p. 223-231. Print. Theodoulou, Kofinis. The Art of the Game. Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadswoth, 2004. Print. Tienda, Miranda. “Closing the gap? Admissions and enrollments at the Texas public flagships before and after affirmative action.” 2003. Web. 18 June, 2012 http://www.texastop10.princeton.edu/publications/tienda012103.pdf Read More